[d3v0 lifeblog]

--
He kind of had a problem, or rather, he had the idea of an idea that would be a problem to have, about geometry.

What do you call the palm that rubs the magic lamp? Is it a pawn? Does the hand feel anything as it is raised to start to rub the lamp and raise the Genie?

The problem wasn't geometry, although he was fine at geometry, the problem was what you could do with the reverse of geometry, which was also geometry, if you could sort of scale up down and scale
it up at the same time and in the right way, and with glue.

He pondered this and wonder who else was itching with the same kind of problem, and if they called it itching. The brain can't itch apparently, so where did they feel it when their brain did itch, did they feel it behind the knee?

The problem was really about what you could do with glue, if you could also do things with geometry. The problem was with things made of geometry.

He wondered if people thought they had rock-grinder-brains that would take intractable material and polish it smooth until it could flow like water, about what sort of analogy they would use.

When you talk about things made of geometry, really, you are talking about things made by machines, which is to say, machines themselves.

Now machines are just machines, they made be made with a purpose, but really the purpose comes from person who sets them in motion.

Now the danger with ideas about idea is application, or really ideology about application, which is kind of like when someone doesn't like your idea about how to do something, and then doesn't like you because of your idea that you thought of, idly.

He wondered about what various ideologies might make of the idea his idea could make, and he didn't like were that went, which is probably into small dark rooms that registered with the trace human pheromones of fear, and dispare.

The idea that the idea applied to was really how you might accomplish one of the ideas of making things in the fast approaching new wave of how to make things.

This wave was the next logical step, like a man walking down a hill who wants to get to the bottom. You kind of get started and then things take their course without you thinking too much about it.

Humans who are into logic, or driven by it, tend to take logical ideas to their conclusion.

Man made the tools that made the tools that made the machines that make the machines that make the things; with many more machines that make the things assembling themselves being the new bit.

Wasn't there some thing he wondered, about politics, about the people and the machines of production? About ownership, about one owning the other? He wondered dimly. But does it inform us about each person having a machine of production, did it talk about that in some important way?

University courses skipped, hard to pick what is relevant down the track. But the idea of the idea in his mind was present, and it was troublesome.

To say it was troublesome was really to say that it was about how to reverse engineer trouble out of the things that the machines that could make things could by the people who owned them, and by what that mean for the people who owned the people, so to speak.

He dimly recalled an article about statics, and early computing, and gaming border to smuggle drugs.
But that was kind of obvious, and it didn't really have much insidiouseness infused in it, didn't really have much reverse engineering, just a new application.

The idea was really a meta idea about how to solve the idea about how to get something made by people who thought they where doing something else.

There is straight out tricking people, but that isn't insideous, that is the domain of con men and fly by night tricksters.

Every good lie is wrapped around a kernel of truth, so a good lie about making things needs to be wrapped around some true things.

We are about to have a lot of things, and thing making things, progressing from the unusual 1980's dot matrix printer to the full duplex colour laser, but not with paper, not just with images, but with our ability to make things themselves.

The idea of the idea wasn't about the things you could make, but it was about how to solve the paradox of making two things at once, some thing that was what its maker wanted it to be but was also what the influencer of the maker wanted to be as well.

We like to call that a paradox, or at least some of us humans do, but if you are an engineer then you just call that a design constraint and put it into the brain along with all the other highly intractable materials; it will get ground around until it flows like water, given time.